The professional relationship between Fifth Circuit’s Judge James Ho and the influential right-wing organization, the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), has sparked discussion in legal circles. It was recently reported by The Lever that there exists not just an ideological but also a financial connection between the judge and the ADF. The organization was the primary counsel in the conservative-backed mifepristone case, which included a controversial ruling that would have revoked decades-old approval of mifepristone, a drug used for medical abortions.
The connection in question comes through Allyson Ho, wife of the judge, and a partner at Gibson Dunn, who has allegedly accepted speaking fees from the ADF between 2018 and 2021. Though no clear violation of judiciary ethics is apparent, given the loose nature of recusal rules, questions concerning impropriety have been raised. As Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, a group advocating for federal court reform, stated: “any entity that is putting money in your spouse’s bank account raises a potential for impropriety if you sit on one of those cases.”
Allyson Ho’s link with ADF extends beyond financials; court filings reveal that she previously worked with the ADF in pursuing a failed petition to the Supreme Court advocating for the allowance of Christian prayers at the start of public county commissioner hearings.
In response to the arising controversy, Judge Ho declared: “I consulted the judiciary’s ethics advisor prior to sitting in this case and was advised that there was no basis for recusal. Allyson’s practice is to donate honoraria to charity.” This potentially conflict-ridden relationship between a judge and a right-wing organization funding a significant case has invited scrutiny within the legal sector regarding the need for reform in the judiciary’s recusal rules.